[OpenLayers-Dev] 2.7 ticket list

Sun Apr 27 21:58:59 EDT 2008

Christopher,

Thanks for the answers, and for the positive feedbacks!

I just have an opinion I would like to share.

...and that instead of having tile.php
> in the OpenLayers examples, we should simply remove it totally.
>

Really? One thing that I liked most in OL is that there are
a lot of examples all in one single place, with all you need
to start playing with OL. In this sense, I think it's  good to
maintaing the php code in there. But that's my humble
thought as a user. As a developer I must agree that it
makes sense putting them on ka-Map only, so future
changes won't require an update on OL example files.

Anyway, I'll follow your recommendation and post those
informations on ka-Map list.

I'll also create an account on OL's trac to easier our
communication about these issues

Any further comments on your tickets, I'll do through trac/seperate
> maisl to the list: thanks for the summary, and the hard work!
>

Sorry, I didn't get it right. Are you saying that future techical
comments should be posted on trac?

regards,

Pedro Simonetti.

2008/4/27 Christopher Schmidt <crschmidt at metacarta.com>:

> On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 10:48:39AM -0300, Pedro Simonetti Garcia wrote:
> > Hi Christopher,
> >
> > I'm new to OL community, so I don't know all the internal
> > proceedings / rules to report bugs, write tickets, and so on.
> > So, forgive me if I skip some steps.
> >
> > I wrote the tickets #327 e #1519 of this list.
> >
> > http://trac.openlayers.org/ticket/327
>
> Right, I need to respond to this one, as the de facto maintainer of the
> ka-Map integration with OpenLayers. What it comes down to, breifly, is
> that I believe the fixes you have described should be happening
> upstream, with the ka-Map project, and that instead of having tile.php
> in the OpenLayers examples, we should simply remove it totally.
> Similarly, 1518 below: the precache.php.txt file does not belong in
> OpenLayers, but I don't see anything particularly wrong with the
> KaMapCache layer, if you're interested in it.
>
> > http://trac.openlayers.org/ticket/1519
>
> This is simple, and I just haven't learned enough about translations to
> test them yet, so I haven't done anything with it. It looksfine in
> general.
>
> > I also wrote a comment on issue #1108, which is related to
> > the #864 that is flagged to 2.7 milestone.
> >
> > http://trac.openlayers.org/ticket/1108
> > http://trac.openlayers.org/ticket/864
> >
> > I'm also the author of the #1518, which is related to the #1519:
> >
> > And I wish to help with this issues, but I'm not sure
> > exactly how to proceed. I reported those tickets using a
> > anonymous username/pass. Should I create a account
> > and post a comment in those tickets to make easier future
> > discussions about them?
>
> That would be good, yeah.
>
> Your patches, in general, look fine, and I'm glad to know you're still
> aware of them and looking to push them forward. So long as that's the
> case, there's no problem leaving them in the current milestone. I'm
> mosty looking to push a lot of things that people have opened and
> forgotten about forward, if there is no active work on them.
>
> Any further comments on your tickets, I'll do through trac/seperate
> maisl to the list: thanks for the summary, and the hard work!
>
> > If you are interested in my help, please let me know.
> >
> > my best regards,
> >
> > Pedro Simonetti.
> >
> > 2008/4/27 Christopher Schmidt <crschmidt at metacarta.com>:
> >
> > > The 2.7 ticket list is a mess. I'd like to put some effort into
> cleaning
> > > it up, but to be honest, it's a bit of a big job for me alone.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> http://trac.openlayers.org/query?status=new&status=assigned&status=reopened&group=type&milestone=2.7+Release
> > >
> > > We have 105 tickets in this release.
> > >
> > > Although some metadata is wrong:
> > >  * 38 are bugs
> > >  * 57 are features
> > >  * 10 are tasks
> > >
> > > Some of these have active work being done on them. Some of them just
> > > need a thorough review. Some of them are probably not being actively
> > > worked on, or are just an idea.
> > >
> > > I think that if there is a ticket here that you consider yourself
> > > 'owner' of -- for example, if you reported it -- and you are no longer
> > > actively working on this ticket, that you move it to a different
> > > milestone than the 2.7 milestone. There is one for 2.8 -- if you're
> not
> > > currently working on it, but you still intend to at some near-future
> > > point, that might be a good place to put it. If you don't intend to
> get
> > > back to it, but you're still interested in the functionality, please
> > > feel free to toss it to the "Future" milestone. Note that this is all
> > > just my opinion, since we don't have any strong rules on this... would
> > > love to hear others opinions.
> > >
> > > I don't think we have any specific plans for 2.7 at this point, but
> I'd
> > > personally like to keep our releases a bit more release-early
> > > release-often than 2.6 ended up being, and the current 100+ tickets
> that
> > > are open is just a bit overwhelming for me...
> > >
> > > Looking forward to hearing/seeing more discussion.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > --
> > > Christopher Schmidt
> > > MetaCarta
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Dev mailing list
> > > Dev at openlayers.org
> > > http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
> > >
>
> --
> Christopher Schmidt
> MetaCarta
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/openlayers-dev/attachments/20080427/2cfd81ed/attachment.html